Are SEC/CFPB/FDIC/OCC Employees Exempt from Federal Raise Announced by Biden?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

If you're mind is blown about attorney salaries, you should look into the salaries of some of the folks who don't do any actual financial regulatory work at these agencies -- the folks in HR, operations, admin, public relations, etc. After having your mind blown, it will full on explode once you take a look at some of those folks. I'll give you a quick preview -- you're going to see lots of numbers much bigger than 190K.

Is there a role at the fdic where I can be in charge of DE&I and have no experience in it but still make 250k???

Not now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

What financial regulatory attorneys are making 300k salary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

What financial regulatory attorneys are making 300k salary?

Whatever. They make plenty for what they do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

What financial regulatory attorneys are making 300k salary?

Agreed - they’re not making $300k and most are not working only 40 hours.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

I mean there are people that leave every year for those jobs and the in-house/trade group jobs… so yes some people would rather be in the private sector.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

I mean there are people that leave every year for those jobs and the in-house/trade group jobs… so yes some people would rather be in the private sector.

Do you know how much those trade group/association attorney jobs pay?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am always astonished at how entitled attorneys are. It blows my mind. There so many at the FDIC just raking it in. 3 years of law school gets you these grand salaries - it's nuts. Same at the other regulators. It's sickening actually.

Learn a bit of history. The higher salaries are intended, by Congress, to reduce the revolving door problem in the financial regulators. And these aren't grand salaries compared to what the banking attorneys, who are always in demand, receive in the private sector.

You act like anyone can just walk in to a financial regulator attorney position. Good luck. They positions are hard to get and ensure high quality hires ilon average.

NP. I hear this all the time from financial regulatory attorneys, but the reality is that they're not interested in going to the private sector. Yes, they are paid less than a high-performing peer in the private sector, but they are not that. While their private sector peers are pushing 80 hours/week, the regulatory attorneys are doing 40. Meanwhile, the agency attorneys are pulling $300K + pension, not bad for what they do.

The majority of attorneys I know at financial regulators work their asses off. Not sure why you have so much disdain for them. And plenty do leave for the private sector; more would leave if the pay was any lower.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know what the FRB raise was/will be in 2023? How about OCC?